IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-14.txt

"Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B)" <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov> Thu, 12 September 2019 16:26 UTC

Return-Path: <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9823120130; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=jpl.nasa.gov
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t3cunIAXpWsp; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppa01.jpl.nasa.gov (ppa01.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02FCD12011F; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (ppa01.jpl.nasa.gov [127.0.0.1]) by ppa01.jpl.nasa.gov (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x8CGOoNe011267; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jpl.nasa.gov; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=InSight1906; bh=cbhAcCT8a6QaxjGe+IOlQnC+rPbCLA35iDhQcPs4EsA=; b=neja1Mvd+DyojozShk2PZI2JWHKQZO9ubikWDS/NuEK2MDu4YjhtWJI188M9DQ8P6fQ2 QQ2ZgS10TA5qgSpLVIuOTKlblw82tHBKxd2CRP0clZacJooVp5hcI/EDemwSLBbr1gIU fr01vnHDUh/GxavM/GOTOL+7mFvHYsY11qmj9XKxjKA+9+nPa/5RoygxoqntPlsWAkXT x4XtylB3e+daA+l9Y9Rhi3faW6qGwwQ2SdhQEgyHfipYBVRGCMUMWVgO+kBfIL8uvmXt EIzP2FzgUer/4tcP2e2fN8p9JD+iDrfnz1cAoVifos6m1f65KDqfIbc9W1dfRIqxwZ+c Pg==
Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (altphysenclup02.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.53]) by ppa01.jpl.nasa.gov with ESMTP id 2uxvvmqkcg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:14 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL (ap-embx16-sp10.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.83]) by smtp.jpl.nasa.gov (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id x8CGQDec000636 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128 bits) verified FAIL); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:13 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL (2002:8095:8953::8095:8953) by ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL (2002:8095:8953::8095:8953) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:12 -0700
Received: from ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL ([fe80::4:f430:47b5:767b]) by ap-embx16-sp10.RES.AD.JPL ([fe80::4:f430:47b5:767b%17]) with mapi id 15.01.1591.008; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:26:12 -0700
From: "Burleigh, Scott C (US 312B)" <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis@ietf.org>, "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-14.txt
Thread-Index: AQHVaWGUxqn8AX0MuUW/YHJ4HCbV2KcoOBaA
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:12 +0000
Message-ID: <e31e3f44215c4babb2c476e5e22d7933@jpl.nasa.gov>
References: <156494879521.26442.11081790719587421210@ietfa.amsl.com> <0d943b23f2d6d3bc929864ea59350958b296d481.camel@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <0d943b23f2d6d3bc929864ea59350958b296d481.camel@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [207.151.104.72]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="SHA1"; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0020_01D5694C.179C2E00"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Source-IP: ap-embx16-sp10.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.137.83]
X-Source-Sender: scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov
X-AUTH: Authorized
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-09-12_08:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1909120170
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/i8iT45k9mdGu_oc8Qhp5gIb1_u8>
Subject: Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-14.txt
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:20 -0000

Magnus, thanks for this.  I haven't yet had time to read through all of your 
comments, but I wanted to get an early start on this first one.  I certainly 
agree that the Status of both the dtn and ipn URI schemes should be permanent, 
but it has been my impression that requesting provisional registries and then 
later asking for them to be made permanent would enable us to move forward 
more quickly.  (The URI registration page notes that "Requests for permanent 
registration must be preceded by mailing list review, per Section 7.2 of 
[RFC7595]".)  If that's not an issue, excellent, I'll revise the I-D.

I think the definition of the dtn scheme is broad enough to be compatible with 
all contemplated use in both BPv6 and BPv7, so I don't think 
BP-version-specific notes need to be included in the registry.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 5:00 AM
To: draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis@ietf.org; dtn@ietf.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-14.txt

Hi,

I have reviewed how this document addresses my AD comments.


> 1. Section 4.1.5.1 and 10 :
>
> As this document uses the "dtn" URI scheme and the "dtn" scheme was
> only provisional registered by RFC 5050 I think this document should
> formally register the DTN URI scheme and thus a new subsection in
> Section 10 is needed.

I note the new section 10.7 registering dtn. However, shouldn't the
Status be permanent rather than provisional?

Secondly, is there any need to discuss how DTN scheme deals with BP
versions?

>
> Also, maybe similar effort to move "ipn" to permeant is needed?

And to my understanding IPN will stay with RFC 6260 and that is fine by
me.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email